Talk:Cohen's Law

From RationalWiki

This one I like :D Yak yak! לול 15:25, 20 June 2007 (CDT)

I like it, and it has infinite possible regressions, like Schwartz's Corollary (Anyone who resorts to the argument that anyone who resorts to the argument that "whoever resorts to ... ... has automatically lost the debate." has automatically lost the debate)

Yes, I quite like this one as well. --Bob_M (talk) 15:39, 20 June 2007 (CDT)

Reminds me of the "longest sci fi story ever written", which was an intro and ending that recursed infinitely into the "story". Clarke, I think. human^{be in} 15:41, 20 June 2007 (CDT)

I suppose that this is a suitable time to come out of the closet and admit that I was BrianCo on CP - one of TK's favorite editors - until I got blocked. (No point trying to find vandalism, Lulz, I was bona fide.) God's peed ^{Babel fish}ÅЯ†ђŮŖ ÐΣй†_{Now look here!} 15:35, 20 June 2007 (CDT)

I bet that closet was crowded over there! human^{be in} 15:41, 20 June 2007 (CDT)

Are you implying that I keep my socks in the closet rather than a chest? God's peed ^{Babel fish}ÅЯ†ђŮŖ ÐΣй†_{Now look here!} 15:49, 20 June 2007 (CDT)

Should this be rewritten as "Whoever resorts to "whoever resorts to ... has automatically lost the debate" has automatically lost the debate." or something more along those lines (i.e., symmetry)? It would be more recursive if it were the same thing in both the inner and outer segment (I ask because I don't know if this is a direct quote). Thunderkatz^Ho! 00:08, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

Yes. ("Anyone" vs. "whoever") and we, as RWers, should also recurse it to at least six levels deep, with our madd wicki skillz. ħuman 02:35, 16 July 2008 (EDT)